Re: [ftpext] FWD: New Version Notification for draft-yevstifeyev-ftp-uri-scheme-03.txt

Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com> Wed, 29 June 2011 04:59 UTC

Return-Path: <evnikita2@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AC1321F86DB; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.784
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.784 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.815, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_PROLOSTOCK_SYM3=1.63]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K9oEpxRD3ndU; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com (mail-fx0-f54.google.com [209.85.161.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E61F21F86D7; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxe4 with SMTP id 4so1129810fxe.27 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:59:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bT12qsfFDGIusVWvm3Lqcc2vE/aWQLpkvYZqdQ9OcB0=; b=NDRFO4fpUuee8tX40H4GWKOTcdUHcQYCU7B8U+zgPr6S4Ypi6aw6SKSb4SdjfcuYTZ P7Nwu4mjsWF7agpA/Wx+MabvQ+vYFFPquh6WFuw72825cZei8V3WOEkCfitaW3YsmuEP lrb9t8XSmbVaUvIvR7VVy3IbiXdFX8BqY3h3U=
Received: by 10.223.13.211 with SMTP id d19mr606399faa.67.1309323591371; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:59:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([195.191.104.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm554465fat.42.2011.06.28.21.59.48 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:59:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E0AB172.4030005@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:00:34 +0300
From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ru; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
References: <4E094D8D.8090001@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106281240030.19858@tvnag.unkk.fr>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106281240030.19858@tvnag.unkk.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>, "ftpext@ietf.org" <ftpext@ietf.org>, URI <uri@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [ftpext] FWD: New Version Notification for draft-yevstifeyev-ftp-uri-scheme-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ftpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ftpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ftpext>, <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ftpext>
List-Post: <mailto:ftpext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext>, <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 04:59:53 -0000

28.06.2011 23:50, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-yevstifeyev-ftp-uri-scheme-03.txt has 
>>> been successfully submitted by Mykyta Yevstifeyev and posted to the 
>>> IETF repository.
>
> I'm afraid this draft is drifting even further into a territory where 
> it dictates how to do FTP in a way I don't think it can or should.
>
> Some random remarks on the -03 version:
>
> Section 2.2
>
> Introduced a typo on line 2, "a file a directory" should be "a file or 
> a directory".
Agreed here.  I'll correct.
>
> Section 2.2.3
>
> I object to (1b) as it is present and then mentioned to be NOT 
> RECOMMENDED and then it is claimed to be there due to "compatibility 
> with some FTP clients" but the only times I've had to use that method 
> it has been to overcome problems caused by FTP servers (or server 
> installations at least). Its existance in the spec is utterly 
> confusing to me.
With regard to this, I think this isn't a problem, so I'll remove this step.
>
> (3) seems to mandate PORT or PASV to be used. This is not how many 
> clients of today work - they prefer EPSV or EPRT and a lot of them 
> also use STAT instead of opening a second connection. I strongly 
> oppose to the the URI spec to dictate this.
I agree here as well - so it will be "arrange data connection using an 
appropriate method (eg. PORT, PASV [RFC0959], EPRT or EPSV [RFC2428] 
command; using historical LPRT and LPSV [RFC1639] for this purpose is 
strongly discouraged);"
>
> Similarly, I object to (4a) and (4b) claiming that NLST should be used 
> to list directories. That's entirely up to the client on how it thinks 
> is best to get the contents of a directory.
With this respect NLST was borrowed from RFC 1738.  So I'll change so 
that (4a) and (4b) will not mention NLST but rather "an appropriate 
method, like LIST, NLST [RFC0959] or MLST [RFC3659] command"

Thanks for your feedback.
Mykyta Yevstifeyev